Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

hls4ml Optimization API [Part 2] #809

Open
wants to merge 9 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

bo3z
Copy link
Contributor

@bo3z bo3z commented Jun 13, 2023

Description

  • Second part of hls4ml Optimization API hls4ml Optimization API [Part 1] #768
  • Introduces Dense Unrolled layers, optimising multiplications with zero in Resource strategy with RF > 1
  • Introduces additional TCL scripts, to optimise zero BRAM blocks.

Type of change

Tests

  • Added a new test, test_dense_unrolled that verifies dense resource layers implement avoiding zero multiplications are correct
  • Comparison with "standard" Dense Resource will be shortly available in the (updated) PR hls4ml Optimization API [Part 1] #768.

Checklist

  • I have read the guidelines for contributing.
  • I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas.
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation.
  • My changes generate no new warnings.
  • I have installed and run pre-commit on the files I edited or added.
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works.

@bo3z
Copy link
Contributor Author

bo3z commented Jun 13, 2023

I will add pre-commit additionally, last time I ran it, some tests were broken, so will add it a subsequent commit.

@bo3z bo3z requested a review from vloncar June 13, 2023 20:37
@jmduarte jmduarte added this to the v0.8.0 milestone Jun 15, 2023
@bo3z
Copy link
Contributor Author

bo3z commented Jun 16, 2023

This is ready for review, seems that pre-commit can re-arrange the order of includes in C++ header files and it could cause compilation error.

@bo3z bo3z force-pushed the hls4ml-optimization-api-part-2 branch from 20ed996 to 0f0adc4 Compare June 16, 2023 11:36
@bo3z bo3z mentioned this pull request Jun 16, 2023
8 tasks
@jmitrevs jmitrevs modified the milestones: v0.8.0, v1.0.0 Oct 20, 2023
@jmitrevs jmitrevs added the please test Trigger testing by creating local PR branch label Jan 8, 2024
@jmitrevs
Copy link
Contributor

jmitrevs commented Feb 7, 2024

We merged part 1. Should we merge part 2?

@vloncar
Copy link
Contributor

vloncar commented Feb 7, 2024

I'm reviewing it. Slowly 😃 . But it's next in line, then HGQ.

@jmitrevs jmitrevs added please test Trigger testing by creating local PR branch and removed please test Trigger testing by creating local PR branch labels May 3, 2024
@jmitrevs
Copy link
Contributor

jmitrevs commented May 3, 2024

The pytest error is unrelated to the PR so from my side this can be merged. I'll let Vladimir give the last OK.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
please test Trigger testing by creating local PR branch
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants